copyright

Commentary drawing on the history of Black musical pioneers such as Ma Rainey, whose recordings were exploited by labels, argues that today's generative AI revives a century-old dispute over who owns and profits from an artist's voice and likeness. Writers say new technology amplifies old patterns of exploitation, and the piece is being shared amid ongoing debates over AI training on musicians' work and new rules on voice replication consent.

British celebrities have won their lobbying campaign against AI companies seeking free use of creative work, and are now cautioning Australia against adopting similar exemptions. Their intervention signals that artists' pressure can shape government policy on AI and copyright, with the UK debate serving as a warning for other countries weighing tech-friendly rules that would let firms train models on creative work without payment.

An academic has warned that the EU's AI legislation systematically fails to protect authors' moral rights, such as attribution and the integrity of their work, as AI systems increasingly train on and generate creative content. Writing in World Trademark Review, the scholar argues that current EU law focuses on economic rights and compliance rules while leaving moral rights largely unaddressed, raising concerns for writers and creators across Europe.

High-profile British creators have successfully pushed back against AI industry lobbying over the use of copyrighted works, a campaign now being studied as Australia weighs its own copyright reforms. Observers say the UK experience shows how artists' collective pressure can shape rules governing AI training on creative work, as Australian policymakers face similar demands from both creators and technology firms.

A Swedish archaeologist reports a conversation with an amateur fiction translator who was startled to learn that using machine translation for anything beyond checking individual words means he cannot put his name on the finished translation. Under most publishers' rules and copyright frameworks, such work is ineligible for translator credit and protections, since authorship is reserved for human translation.

Pope Leo XIV has spoken out against AI-generated art, signalling disapproval of the technology's growing role in creative work. The remarks, reported by TechCrunch, are drawing attention because they come from a prominent religious leader weighing in on one of today's most contested technology debates, joining wider arguments over copyright, authenticity and the value of human creativity.

AI music startup Suno has released a new tool that automatically adds musical accompaniment to spoken audio, turning narration, podcasts or voice recordings into songs or scored tracks. The launch, reported by Bloomberg and The Business Times, is drawing attention for how far generative music tools have moved beyond text prompts into processing existing audio. Users and industry watchers are discussing its potential for creators and the ongoing copyright questions around AI-generated music.

A new discussion examines the use of artificial intelligence tools to decompile video games, covering what the technology can currently achieve, its future potential, and the legal questions around copyright and reverse engineering. The piece reflects growing interest in whether AI can accelerate the fan-driven preservation of older games, and where the practice crosses legal lines.

Academics warn that video games are becoming increasingly difficult, and in some cases impossible, to preserve for future study and cultural memory. The problems cited in wider coverage of the issue include server-dependent online games, digital-only releases, DRM and copyright restrictions, which mean titles can vanish entirely when publishers shut down services. Researchers are calling for exemptions and better archiving infrastructure so gaming history is not lost.

Sony Music Publishing and Warner Chappell have joined forces in a billion-dollar intellectual property lawsuit against AI company founders, with song lyrics — not recordings — at the center of the case. Industry observers note that AI companies are facing a fresh wave of legal attacks from rights holders. The suit signals that music publishers are now targeting AI systems trained on or generating copyrighted text.

The Pitt News has published an opinion piece exploring fan edits as an art form. The column examines how fans rework existing films, shows and other media into new creations, a practice that has grown hugely online. The piece weighs the creativity involved in fan editing against questions of authorship and copyright.

A French court has ordered hosting provider OVH to block access to two major piracy websites, following a complaint from rights holders. The ruling is seen as a notable move against online copyright infringement, raising questions about hosting platforms' responsibility for content they host and the reach of judicial blocking orders in France.

ClearTunes, a company selling electronics to correctional facilities, marketed a transparent handheld gaming console to prisoners that came loaded with around fifty unlicensed games. The device, sold as a see-through handheld, raises questions about how unlicensed software ended up on products distributed in prisons and who approved the deal.

German tech news outlet heise+ examines the long-running legal dispute between Kraftwerk and producer Moses Pelham over a two-second sample, asking when sampling can qualify as a permitted 'pastiche' under copyright law without a licence. The piece explains that using others' recordings generally requires rights-holder permission, and outlines the narrow circumstances in which courts allow unlicensed use as parody-style pastiche.

The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation has published a proposal calling on Congress to allow US courts to order the blocking of foreign websites that distribute pirated content. The blog post, titled 'Break the Pirates', argues that current enforcement tools are inadequate against offshore piracy operations. The proposal touches on long-running debates over internet regulation and free expression, and is likely to draw scrutiny from both copyright holders and digital rights advocates.

Axios reports that artificial intelligence is heading into what it calls an existential legal crisis, as courts and regulators grapple with questions the law is not equipped to answer. The piece examines disputes over liability, copyright, and accountability as AI systems spread, and the mounting pressure on lawmakers to clarify who is responsible when AI causes harm.